WBAL: Redskins win naming battle(Merged)

[Art]

Serously??? This has to be one of the most arrogant post I've ever read here.The links I provide prove that it was used that way years ago,to say no ...well it's ignorant.Is it used that way now ...no of course not,we all know the intent of the meaning now.

Yet that still doesn't change things ,why don't you pick an ethnic slur ...anyone and go out and use it in a "good" way and tell us what happens?

Arrogance tends to stem when someone posts ignorance. The link you displayed is an interest group creating a propoganda piece. It convinced you, but, doesn't alter reality. Redskin has never been a slur. The harshest, most insulting use referred to the scalping of Indians and the reward associated with the Redskin hides. This is certainly not a great term in the 1800s.

When we named our team the Redskins, in the 1930s, it was named such not at all because of the 1800s phrasing. It was named such to brand a football team with something respectful and honorable and inspirational. All teams seek to find something unique and honorable. No team uses a racial slur for their name. The Indians coming closer than redskin to being that.

You've heard from an actual native in this thread. You've heard from people who've worked on reservations. You may not know, but likely have seen or heard, studies reveal reservation Indians have no problem with the term. It's simply not ******. It's never been. It'll never be.

To attempt to create it as such is a failing position.

[81artmonk]

My family and I frequent a resort called lake havasu in california. The whole place is owned by indians and is an indian reservation. Since I am Redskins fan I always wear clothing with something redskins on it.

I never get any comments, and at times I have asked a few at stores or resaurants and they don't care. In fact, some are even proud that their legacy is being carried on by a sports team.

[Kosher Ham]

As part of the less than 1% in this Country. I have never had a problem with it, and neither has anyone in my family.

This whole thing is so stupid to me and always has been. I get called Hawaiian and Hispanic before anyone ever considers me part of that less than 1% .

[Thinking Skins]

egit question...if you answer the burgandy and gold team, then you actually feel the same as I do...

I need to look no further than to the Washington Wizards to show my loyalties. I was a fan of the Bullets and sometimes I still call them by that name, but I didn't stop rooting for them because Abe decided to change the name.

Your examples all involved a change in cities. I root for my hometown teams. So if Dan Snyder were to take the Redskins and move them to LA and we got an expansion franchise (like what happened to the Colts and the Browns), then I'd root for the new team. But if we simply change our name, I'll still root for this team, whatever they're called.

But you're allowed to root for whoever you root for. And if you're not a Nationals fan because you've still got memories of Washington Baseball in the 1950s and don't want to adopt a new team, then you go right ahead. Thats your right.

Just don't be surprised if Danny doesn't care what you think.

[Kosher Ham]

^^^ If the Redskins moved to L.A. I would still be a Redskins fan. If they changed the name...ehhh...maybe I would lose some interest. Its been around 75 years...

[Thinking Skins]

I wonder how many LOYAL Browns fans still embraced the Ravens in 1996 when they changed their name, colors and logo and moved to Baltimore...hey, it was still all the same players...

I do know that there is still a fan base for the Rams and Raiders in Los Angeles and a fan base in St Louis for the Cardinals...yet there is not a single player that plays for the Rams, Raiders or Cardinals that played in the former city...

So the team moved away and no players remain...but the fans do...why? The name and colors...

There's still A FAN BASE for the Colts in Baltimore and for the Ravens in Cleveland. Just because everybody doesn't belong to this fan base doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just like there's a fan base for the Cowboys in DC. I'm sure if Danny and Vinny swapped teams, these DC Cowboys fans would be pretty happy.

But what about teams like the Bucks that change their colors? Did their fans suddenly disappear?

[Thinking Skins]

^^^ If the Redskins moved to L.A. I would still be a Redskins fan. If they changed the name...ehhh...maybe I would lose some interest. Its been around 75 years...

Thats your right as a fan.

[Kosher Ham]

Thats your right as a fan.

I should have said if they move and change the name.

Them moving wouldn't stop me from being a fan.

Them changing their name wouldn't stop me either.

But if they did both ? I would probably root for some random AFC team that has never won a Superbowl, like the Texans.

[Art]

I'm a fan of the Washington Redskins. If that team goes away, there's no reason to maintain such extreme loyalty. I'm not sure I understand the concept. I used to be a huge Washington Bullets fan. When they went away, I stopped being a huge fan of any team in the NBA. I still root for, mildly, the team from the area I grew up in, which is why I'm still a Baltimore Orioles fan and not a Washington Nationals fan.

[Thinking Skins]

Owner George Preston Marshall renamed the Washington team "Redskins" after moving it from Boston, where the team were known as the "Braves". Marshall was a notorious racist; he was the instigator of the banning of black players in the NFL the game from the mid 1930's to mid 1940's.

The Redskins, under Marshall, were the last team to have a black player on their roster - Bobby Mitchell integrated the team back in, I believe, 1961 or '62.

I wonder if the motivation behind Marshall naming the team the Redskins was really because of the coach who supposedly was part Native American. I've read stories that the coach in fact lied about this Native American heritage.

Part of me really has a hard time believing that Marshall was the most honest of individuals.

[Thinking Skins]

I'm a fan of the Washington Redskins. If that team goes away, there's no reason to maintain such extreme loyalty. I'm not sure I understand the concept. I used to be a huge Washington Bullets fan. When they went away, I stopped being a huge fan of any team in the NBA. I still root for, mildly, the team from the area I grew up in, which is why I'm still a Baltimore Orioles fan and not a Washington Nationals fan.

See thats where you and I disagree. I was never a fan of the Orioles because I can't stand Baltimore. I liked Cal Rypken and Brady Anderson growing up, but I couldn't bring myself to root for that team. Now that we've got a team in DC, I have more fun rooting for them. Similarly, I root for UMD, Georgetown and other local teams in college hoops.

What can I say? I love my city.

[Kosher Ham]

See thats where you and I disagree. I was never a fan of the Orioles because I can't stand Baltimore. I liked Cal Rypken and Brady Anderson growing up, but I couldn't bring myself to root for that team. Now that we've got a team in DC, I have more fun rooting for them. Similarly, I root for UMD, Georgetown and other local teams in college hoops.

What can I say? I love my city.

I can't stand the city of Baltimore either. But back in the day for me...The Nationals did not exist. You had the Orioles as local games you could go to. I am still an Orioles fan and always will be. I look at the Nationals as a team I don't mind winning.

But I have only ever rooted for the Terps. I don't mind the local teams because they are not in the same conference. But I would never root for them unless they were playing an ACC rival. Kudos to GW, GU, etc., but I will never go to a game wearing their colors supporting that team.

I have been to probably 20 N.E. Patriots games over the years. I can't imagine rooting for that team unless it helps the Redskins. I root for the teams that play Redskins' rivals every week, but never any other time.

[RedSunday]

Arrogance tends to stem when someone posts ignorance. The link you displayed is an interest group creating a propoganda piece. It convinced you, but, doesn't alter reality. Redskin has never been a slur. The harshest, most insulting use referred to the scalping of Indians and the reward associated with the Redskin hides. This is certainly not a great term in the 1800s.

When we named our team the Redskins, in the 1930s, it was named such not at all because of the 1800s phrasing. It was named such to brand a football team with something respectful and honorable and inspirational. All teams seek to find something unique and honorable. No team uses a racial slur for their name. The Indians coming closer than redskin to being that.

You've heard from an actual native in this thread. You've heard from people who've worked on reservations. You may not know, but likely have seen or heard, studies reveal reservation Indians have no problem with the term. It's simply not ******. It's never been. It'll never be.

To attempt to create it as such is a failing position.

The fact that you refuse to accept something doesn't make it any less so Art.Fact the term Redskin has always been considerd racist and though the years as with the Native Americans been thrown to the side and ignored, to the point people don't pay it anymind.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/16/opinion/main1901662.shtml

Yeah the're people here who claim to be of Indian decent,maybe yes maybe no,same with others claims that there wives work for the same Law firm......(yeah) who knows we take what is said here with a grain of salt.I was not swayed by one group or another.As I said in another post I studied Indian forlklore when I was younger like it or not there is some truth to this and that truth will not change.

I understand the stance that it has been our name for decades why now,I agree with that but I don't agree with the stance that it isn't a racist slur and that it never was....that is arrogant and ignorant and if that comes from what something you post like you said in your post ...well ?

[FunBunch7]

There's still A FAN BASE for the Colts in Baltimore and for the Ravens in Cleveland. Just because everybody doesn't belong to this fan base doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just like there's a fan base for the Cowboys in DC. I'm sure if Danny and Vinny swapped teams, these DC Cowboys fans would be pretty happy.

But what about teams like the Bucks that change their colors? Did their fans suddenly disappear?

No...cuz they're still the "Bucs"

And I have to seriously DOUBT there is still a fan base in Cleveland for the Ravens...that hatred has to run ALOT deeper than Skins/Cowboys or even Yankees/Red Sox

[FunBunch7]

I

Your examples all involved a change in cities. I root for my hometown teams. So if Dan Snyder were to take the Redskins and move them to LA and we got an expansion franchise (like what happened to the Colts and the Browns), then I'd root for the new team. But if we simply change our name, I'll still root for this team, whatever they're called.

But you're allowed to root for whoever you root for. And if you're not a Nationals fan because you've still got memories of Washington Baseball in the 1950s and don't want to adopt a new team, then you go right ahead. Thats your right.

Just don't be surprised if Danny doesn't care what you think.

You called out "where my loyalties lie"...and thats fine...we see that your's lie with your home town and thats fine...mine however lie with the Redskins (AS LONG as they're the Redskins)

[Predicto]

...but if the name ever does change and our colors go away, it will be because he fell to the pressure...and yes, I would be outta here.

I'm not ever going to root for some team called the Washington Americans with blue and white colors or whatever they would call themsleves...would you?

I disagree. If they change the name I won't care. They will still be my team, forever.

You see, I'm a REAL fan.

[JMS]

This victory celebration is way premature. This case was submitted 17 years ago and the Skins won on a technicality. The Skins argued that the folks who submitted this objection to the name waited too long as all were in their late 20's or older when they submitted the case.... The judge agreed and dismissed this case saying they should have voiced their objections when they turned

The same folks who brought this case several years ago filled a new lawsuit using 16, 17, and 18 year olds as the suit bringers. That case was frozen waiting for this case to be settled.

So this settlement actually did not settle the question, and this technicality won't carry the day in the new case which is now on deck.

[Thinking Skins]

This victory celebration is way premature. This case was submitted 17 years ago and the Skins won on a technicality. The Skins argued that the folks who submitted this objection to the name waited too long as all were in their late 20's or older when they submitted the case.... The judge agreed and dismissed this case saying they should have voiced their objections when they turned

The same folks who brought this case several years ago filled a new lawsuit using 16, 17, and 18 year olds as the suit bringers. That case was frozen waiting for this case to be settled.

So this settlement actually did not settle the question, and this technicality won't carry the day in the new case which is now on deck.

Yeah, thats what I said in my first post in this thread. I'm interested in seeing where this new case goes.

[Predicto]

Redskin is a word with a history that is not positive. Trying to pretend that this isnt the case is simply dishonest sophistry.

Now it may be that the sting of the name is long gone, and that it shouldn't matter any more, but that is a different question.

By the way, all of you that say that the name was originally chosen in the 1930s as an honor to native americans, the fact is we don't really know. There are about 5 different stories about how the name was chosen, and no one really seems to know which one is accurate.

I do know this. George Preston Marshall, the owner of the Redskins in the 1930s, was umm... not the most racially enliightened man in the world.

Marshall.... is best known for his intractable opposition to having African-Americans on his roster. According to professor Charles Ross, "For 24 years Marshall was identified as the leading racist in the NFL".[1] Though the league had previously had a sprinkling of black players, blacks were excluded from all NFL teams just one year after Marshall entered the league.

Ross asserts that Marshall propelled the NFL to institute a "color barrier" akin to that of its baseball brethren. As a result of Marshall's prodding, owners like the Pittsburgh Steelers' Art Rooney (who had hired a black player on his first team and strongly professed his belief that black and white were equal to him) and the Chicago Bears' George Halas (who also believed that blacks should be able to play), fell into line. Of course, no one openly admitted that a racial line existed, but it was apparent that it did. Indeed, years later, Halas remained defensive of the thinly veiled policy. "The game," claimed the legendary league founder and coach, "didn't have the appeal to black players at the time." Hence, from 1934 through the 1945 season, blacks, excluded from the NFL, were forced to settle for less than financially-rewarding exhibitions or semi-pro leagues.

While the rest of the league began signing individual blacks in 1946 and actually drafting blacks in 1949, Marshall held out until 1962 before signing a black player. Moreover, the signing only came when Interior Secretary Stewart Udall issued an ultimatum – unless Marshall signed a black player, the government would revoke the Redskins' 30-year lease on the year-old D.C. Stadium (now Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium), which had been paid for by government money and was owned by the Washington city government (which, then and now, is formally an arm of the federal government).

Given that our owner was a flat out racist, it is not that hard to imagine that the name Redskins was not chosen as an honor to anyone. :whoknows:

[RedSunday]

This victory celebration is way premature. This case was submitted 17 years ago and the Skins won on a technicality. The Skins argued that the folks who submitted this objection to the name waited too long as all were in their late 20's or older when they submitted the case.... The judge agreed and dismissed this case saying they should have voiced their objections when they turned

The same folks who brought this case several years ago filled a new lawsuit using 16, 17, and 18 year olds as the suit bringers. That case was frozen waiting for this case to be settled.

So this settlement actually did not settle the question, and this technicality won't carry the day in the new case which is now on deck.

Thank You ,this was kinda what I was heading for but I got derailed as sometimes I get lost in thought.:doh:

[FunBunch7]

I disagree. If they change the name I won't care. They will still be my team, forever.

You see, I'm a REAL fan.

So you are a REAL fan of the "City". So if the Redskins ceased to exist and the team changed to the...let's say...Washington Hummingbirds and their colors were blue, black and brown...you would still be a fan? Out with the Hoggettes...No more "Hogs"...The Redskin Marching Band...gone...??

If so, hey thats cool...it will show that "your" loyalties lie with the City...mine just happen to lie with the name and colors.

...and yes, I am a real fan! You don't spend a $1,000 on airfare, rental car and hotel room and a game ticket while traveling from Phoenix to DC by yourself if you are not a real fan.

You guys...we are all on the same side here...some of us are native to the DC area and our loyalties lie with the city...some of us are not natives of the area and our loyalties lie with the name and colors...

[Shi no Tenshi]

The fact that you refuse to accept something doesn't make it any less so Art.Fact the term Redskin has always been considerd racist and though the years as with the Native Americans been thrown to the side and ignored, to the point people don't pay it anymind.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/16/opinion/main1901662.shtml

Yeah the're people here who claim to be of Indian decent,maybe yes maybe no,same with others claims that there wives work for the same Law firm......(yeah) who knows we take what is said here with a grain of salt.I was not swayed by one group or another.As I said in another post I studied Indian forlklore when I was younger like it or not there is some truth to this and that truth will not change.

I understand the stance that it has been our name for decades why now,I agree with that but I don't agree with the stance that it isn't a racist slur and that it never was....that is arrogant and ignorant and if that comes from what something you post like you said in your post ...well ?

I must say, if you feel so strongly about how much the Native American has been wronged, why don't you do something worth while about it? You like putting out opinion pieces to backup your claims, yet they are only one (white) mans opinion.

In some ways, it is almost insulting that you feel the need to help out us "downtrodden" Natives since we obviously can't do it ourselves. Despite hearing that most of us don't really care one way or another, or tend to have a more positive look at it, you still have your crusade. Why don't you turn that energy into something useful?

A word has whatever power you give it. It wouldn't be hard at all to make sure those referenced by the term Redskin were glorified. That's the point of it being a mascot, no? And if that were the social connotation, if by Redskin you were referring to the brave and noble Natives, would that not be a more positive thing, instead of trying to make it so negative that everybody gets up in arms about it?

The Native population doesn't care about the name, barring a small vocal minority. Having relatives on the tribal council, I know for a fact they have a hell of a lot bigger problems to worry about then something this trivial. You should do some research on those problems instead, and actually help the Natives get out of the pit they are currently in, instead of fighting for a name change of a sports team that would have no positive impact on the Native American population.

Say you get your way. Lets say every reference to Native Americans are struck from the records of sports mascots. Please, instead of continually posting your propaganda and opinions, post how that action is going to help the Natives. Do something useful.

[TK]

A word has whatever power you give it.

Ding.

[Mickalino]

instead of fighting for a name change of a sports team that would have no positive impact on the Native American population.

that sums it up right there.

[Predicto]

So you are a REAL fan of the "City". So if the Redskins ceased to exist and the team changed to the...let's say...Washington Hummingbirds and their colors were blue, black and brown...you would still be a fan? Out with the Hoggettes...No more "Hogs"...The Redskin Marching Band...gone...??

If so, hey thats cool...it will show that "your" loyalties lie with the City...mine just happen to lie with the name and colors.

...and yes, I am a real fan! You don't spend a $1,000 on airfare, rental car and hotel room and a game ticket while traveling from Phoenix to DC by yourself if you are not a real fan.

You guys...we are all on the same side here...some of us are native to the DC area and our loyalties lie with the city...some of us are not natives of the area and our loyalties lie with the name and colors...

I'm a fan of the team, including its history, good and ill. I am a fan of the memory of Sonny Jurgensen to Charlie Taylor, and the bleachers bouncing in the east end of old RFK, and, yes, singing Hail to the Redskins at the top of my lungs. I'm a fan forever because my Dad loved the Redskins and it is part of my connection to his memory. I'm a fan despite having moved away from DC in 1980 and never returning.

I'm not going to abandon all that in a hissy fit about "political correctness" if there is a name change for the team. It's still my team, whatever the name.